President Obama didn’t give his attorney general much cover. The White House said it was deferring to Mr. Holder’s judgment.

The decision in favor of civilian trials created an uproar. Critics said it would make New York a target for terrorist reprisals. They also complained about the cost of providing security. Others said the defendants, as terrorist “soldiers,” did not deserve the protections of civilian courts and should face military tribunals instead.

Mr. Holder’s supporters said America’s civilian courts had handled previous terrorism cases with distinction and could do the same for “KSM” and the others. Civilian trials would satisfy world opinion that the terrorists received fair trials. America’s system would shine in contrast to terrorist methods.

But Congress passed a law against trying Guantanamo detainees in U.S. courts. So a year ago Mr. Holder reluctantly announced that he was transferring the cases to military jurisdiction.

Mr. Obama once again said that he supported Mr. Holder’s decision.

In the latest development, the Pentagon has cleared the way for Khalid Sheik Mohammed and the others to be tried by military commissions at Guantanamo Bay which will have the option of imposing the death penalty if the men are convicted.

The ACLU said the Obama administration “is making a terrible mistake by prosecuting the most important terrorism trials of our time in a second-tier system of justice.” Information obtained under torture would be used in the trials, the ACLU charged.

Military officials, however, said the defendants would be provided with a capable defense team and that military rules do not allow evidence obtained under torture to be admitted.

What do you think? Should the 9/11 mastermind have been tried in New York City? Leave a comment or click on the link below to take our poll.